Personal Cricket Statutes

[Richard]

That looks like the one day side that toured Australia the time before last. They got smashed then and Australia had a weaker one day side at that time.

The current line up would have to be better wouldn't it?

The players then, basically:
Mark Waugh
Gilchrist (though England still had the wood on him then)
Ponting (despite the drink problems exposed during that tourno)
Stephen Waugh (though he missed more than he played)
Bevan
Warne
Fleming
McGrath
The players now:
Bevan, Ponting, Gilchrist, McGrath, Gillespie, Lehmann, possibly Clarke. The overrated (IMO) players, many of whom are also flattered by their stats:
Lee, Kasprowicz, Bichel (though fortunately not in TVS Cup 2003), Bracken, Williams, Harvey, Watson, Hauritz, Hayden, Hogg.
Yes, many of that side were in Australia last time. Of them:
Knight desperately underperformed.
Stewart was opening when he should have been batting five or six. Hence he failed spectacularly.
Hick did superbly.
Fairbrother did phenominally in the first half, flattened-out in the second.
Thorpe was injured.
Hussain batted too high in the order (four).
Gough bowled OK sometimes, very poorly at others.
Caddick didn't take part in either leg of that tour. Too volatile, apparently, according to the selectors of the day.
Croft didn't, I don't think, play in the one-day leg, but I may be remembering incorrectly.
Ealham did well in some matches, not so good in others.
Mullally was comfortably England's best bowler of the series.
Alleyne actaully did well in limited opportunities.
The substandard members of that squad: Adam Hollioake, Ben Hollioake (Rest His Soul), Giles, Crawley, Headley. I may have forgotten others.
I think I've covered everything.

 

[Richard]

You cannot seriously suggest that should be England's ODI XI at the moment (ignoring retirements).

Lots of those players are no better than average, and certainly not as good as the players in the side at the moment.

So, instead of refuting my suggestion that these players have good records (which would make you look very silly indeed as it's completely untrue) you restate that they are average.
If you wish to consider them average, that's fine, but that truly is "putting your opinion across as fact", which Eclipse is only too quick to accuse me of.
None of these players are average, otherwise I wouldn't suggest that they were good.
See, I can do it, if I wish to.

 

[Richard]

Bichel is amazingly fit.

Just a shame he's such a poor bowler, then.

 

[Richard]

Funnily enough I saw him in that and he literally took the breathe away - so quick and accurate, it was a pleasure to watch.

Yeah - so quick and so accurate, he went for 5.77-an-over and took 2 wickets at over 63.
Fantastic.
I'd seen him bowl before then and there seemed nothing special about his bowling - certainly his accuracy leaves much to be desired and while he's one of these bowlers who picks-up a lot of wickets, I don't (you'll be surprised to know) set any stall by the simple fact that he has wickets against his name.

 

[Richard]

There's a difference between saying something and doing it, a big difference.

If it's so difficult to do, why does anyone bother saying you should do it?
If something's all but impossible, there really is no point telling someone to try and do it.

 

[Neil Pickup]

If something's all but impossible, there really is no point telling someone to try and do it.

So we should never tell a kid struggling with cricket/work to try to achieve good grades/score plenty of runs?

What's the phrase you're so fond of? Apologist for Mediocrity?

If it's so difficult to do, why does anyone bother saying you should do it?

If something's difficult, surely it should be aspired to?!

 

[Richard]

I never said forgetting every ball was an unrealistic expectation - that was you!
You should always set high standards. Unrealistic standards, meanwhile, is yet another MOO and always will be.

 

[marc71178]

None of these players are average, otherwise I wouldn't suggest that they were good.

2 words.

Usman Afzaal

 

[marc71178]

The overrated (IMO) players, many of whom are also flattered by their stats:
Lee

Brett Lee overrated in ODI. Right.

I guess he could be averaging less or taking wickets at a quicker rate, but in that case so can every other bowler in world cricket, so every bowler is overrated?

Stewart was opening when he should have been batting five or six. Hence he failed spectacularly.

In ODI's, Stewart's highest average by position is opening (apart from 2 knocks at number 8, 1 not out)

So obviously he failed because he wasn't batting at 5 or 6 (where his average is 4 or 5 less)

 

[Craig]

I don't think averages and strike-rates (when bowling) prove much as you are only bowling only ten overs whereas in FC cricket you can bowl as many as you like.

So I dont read much into Lee's Average and S/R.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I don't think averages and strike-rates (when bowling) prove much as you are only bowling only ten overs whereas in FC cricket you can bowl as many as you like.

So I dont read much into Lee's Average and S/R.

You'd think that S/R would be more relevant when you only have 10 overs to work with. The innings is limited to a max. of 50 overs which means that you have a limited time to take wickets in, which means that you'd have to take them quicker than in Tests.

Consider defending 150. Would you prefer a bowler with a SR of 25 and econ. on 5 or a bowler with a SR of 60 and an econ. of 3?

 

[Craig]

It would be better if I had both in my team then I could bowl.

Perhaps one to be skimpy on the runs and one to the take the wickets.

There is no reason to be quick, take wickets and be econmical.

 

[age_master]

You'd think that S/R would be more relevant when you only have 10 overs to work with. The innings is limited to a max. of 50 overs which means that you have a limited time to take wickets in, which means that you'd have to take them quicker than in Tests.

Consider defending 150. Would you prefer a bowler with a SR of 25 and econ. on 5 or a bowler with a SR of 60 and an econ. of 3?

yeah, exactly, you want a wicket taker to take a couple of wickets - there is always more pressure on in OD games when you are chasing and you are a couple down early.



on Stewart i think you will find that a major variation in his stats is as captain where he averaged 8 less

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yet Brett Lee takes wickets because he's quick.

 

[luckyeddie]

on Stewart i think you will find that a major variation in his stats is as captain where he averaged 8 less

Captain + Keeper : 22.63
Captain, not Keeper : 32.00
Not Captain + Keeper : 38.50
Not captain, not Keeper : 22.92

 

[Eclipse]

Brett Lee the smoker?

ummm... yeah what ever.

I can catagoricly say Brett Lee does not smoke. I dont know if he ever has but he does not at the moment.

regardless he can run the 100m in 11.03 seconds and if you have ever seen him in the feild he is lightning fast and can run all day.

 

[Richard]

2 words.

Usman Afzaal

Yes, Usman Afzaal, who has one of the highest List-A one-day batting averages going around in this country ATM.
Still, I don't expect that to mean much to you. The fact that he failed in Tests, when he should never even have been considered because his First-Class record is anything but impressive, is naturally far more important.

 

[Richard]

I can catagoricly say Brett Lee does not smoke. I dont know if he ever has but he does not at the moment.

Good good.
I wonder, given that you know so much about Australian players, whether you could tell me if Michael Slater smokes?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Yes, Usman Afzaal, who has one of the highest List-A one-day batting averages going around in this country ATM.
Still, I don't expect that to mean much to you. The fact that he failed in Tests, when he should never even have been considered because his First-Class record is anything but impressive, is naturally far more important.

With the amount of List A cricket played every year and Afzaal avges 35.33.

If 35.33 with 1 hundred and 20 fifties in 85 innings is one of the best OD batsmen in England, then God save England.

 

[Richard]

Brett Lee overrated in ODI. Right.

I guess he could be averaging less or taking wickets at a quicker rate, but in that case so can every other bowler in world cricket, so every bowler is overrated?

I did mention flattered by his stats?
But of course, that's not possible, is it?

In ODI's, Stewart's highest average by position is opening (apart from 2 knocks at number 8, 1 not out)

So obviously he failed because he wasn't batting at 5 or 6 (where his average is 4 or 5 less)

Stewart's averages from 1998 onwards (the most recent part of his career and hence the most significant):
Opening: 31.08 (and if you take away one period in which he played exclusively Bangladesh, West Indies and Zimbabwe it's 19.24)
Four to eight: 31.9
For me it's as simple as since 1998 the only runs Stewart has scored when opening are against the three weakest ODI attacks. I don't really give a damn about what happened in 1989 as it's rather a long time ago.